JOYCE ARDIENTE VS. SPOUSES JAVIER AND MA.

THERESA PASTORFIDE,
CAGAYAN DE ORO WATER DISTRICT AND GASPAR GONZALEZ, JR.

GR NO. 161291; JULY 17, 2013

J. PERALTA
TOPIC: HUMAN RELATIONS (PRINCIPLE OF ABUSE OF RIGHTS)
FACTS: Petitioner Joyce Ardiente and her husband owned a housing unit at Emily Homes,
Balulang, Cagayan De Oro. Sometime in 1994, petitioner entered into a Memorandum of
Agreeement(MOA) selling, transferring and conveying in favor of herein respondent Ma.
Theresa Pastorfide all their rights and interests in the housing unit. A stipulation in that MOA
states that the water and power bill of the subject property shall be for the account of
Pastorfide.
On March 2, 1999, without notice, the water connection of respondent Pastorfide was cut off.
Upon inquiring to the local water district, she was told that she was delinquent for three (3)
consecutive months. However, Pastorfide argued that the due date of her payment was March
18, 1999 yet. Later on, she was told that it was at the instance of herein petitioner that the
water line was cut-off.
On March 15, 1999, respondent already took care of the delinquent bills, despite of such her
water line was only restored and reconnected when the trial court issued a writ of preliminary
injunction on December 14, 1999.
Respondent then filed a complaint for damages against Ardiente, Cagayan De Oro Water
District and Gaspar Gonzales, as the general manager.
RTC ordered Ardiente, COWD and Gonzales to jointly and severally pay respondent
Pastorfied of moral damages, exemplary damages and attorney’s fees, on the ground that in
the exercise of their rights and performance of their duties, they did not act with justice, gave
respondent their due and observe honesty and good faith. As COWD and Gonzales did not
even send a disconnection notice before cutting the water line of Pastorfide.
On appeal, CA affirmed the decision of the RTC with modification as to the amount of
damages, reducing to 100k each for moral and exemplary damages and 25k for attorney’s
fees. CA ruled that, with respect to petitioner Ardiente, she has the legal duty to honor the
possession and use of water line by Mrs. Pastorfide pursuant to their MOA, clearly she acted
in bad faith causing prejudice and injury to Mrs. Pastorfide.
ISSUE: WON Petitioner Joyce Ardiente is liable for abuse of rights, hence solidarily liable
with COWD and Gonzales.
RULING: Yes, Petitioner is liable as she was the one who requested to disconnect Spouses
Pastofide’s water supply. It is true that it is within petitioner’s right to ask and even require
the Spouses Pastorfide to cause the transfer of the former’s account with COWD to the
latter’s name pursuant to their MOA. However, the remedy to enforce such right is not to
cause the disconnection of the respondent spouses’ water supply.
The exercise of a right must be in accordance with the purpose for which it was established
and must not be excessive or unduly harsh; there must be no intention to harm another. In the
present case, intention to harm was evident on the part of petitioner when she requested for
the disconnection of respondent spouses’ water supply without warning or informing the
latter of such request. On the part of COWD and Gonzales, it is their failure to give prior
notice of the impending disconnection and their subsequent neglect to reconnect respondent
spouses’ water supply despite the latter’s settlement of their delinquent account.
A right, though by itself legal because recognized or granted by law as such, may
nevertheless become the source of some illegality. On the basis of the foregoing, the Court
finds no cogent reason to depart from the ruling of both RTC and CA that petitioner, COWD
and Gonzales are solidarily liable.